pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
PvXwiki:Admin noticeboard/Resolved Build-Specific Issues/Archive 2
__TOC__ I realize this may come off as biased (since it's my build), but, Zuranthium's vote ignores the fact that the Ranger Secondary is used primarily for spammable unblockability via Called Shot (in order to punish Prot Monks), whereas a Paragon Secondary provides only very limited options for unblockability, since the only unblockable skills have longer recharges. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 20:50, 6 September 2007 (CEST) :Grinch got it. -- Armond Warblade 02:59, 7 September 2007 (CEST) revert to original. Skakid9090 00:23, 10 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 05:11, 14 September 2007 (CEST) obvious 5-5-5ing by author(s) incredibly biased. Skakid9090 01:36, 12 September 2007 (CEST) :bumpity bump bump Skakid9090 03:13, 13 September 2007 (CEST) ::They all have reasons... needs less coord? Come on... -- [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (T/ /Sysop) 03:36, 13 September 2007 (CEST) :::i didnt know "HA HA AB DIS IS PWN" and similar comments counted as 'good' Skakid9090 03:38, 13 September 2007 (CEST) Auron's vote mentions non-existant energy problems. Tycn says rodgot is better when is has a very different style. Morten, Abedeus and Klomi mention nerfs that didnt have a major effect on the build.--Coloneh 02:47, 13 September 2007 (CEST) :Tycn's vote is already removed, Auron is right about the e-mgmt problems of SF (which he also explains in a little detail), and the nerf(s) did have a major effect on the build. That's why SF/SF-way isn't run in high-level PvP anymore. - Krowman 04:00, 13 September 2007 (CEST) voter shows clearly that he didn't test. Skakid9090 03:48, 14 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 05:11, 14 September 2007 (CEST) Saying a build is bad because a specific other build would counter it shows a lack of understanding of game mechanics given that every build has counters, and, the build he cites probably wouldn't even work, given than an AoG Derv would probably be foiled by the hex Necro. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 17:56, 14 September 2007 (CEST) :Sigh... user re-voted, and he responded in part to why I believed his comment should have been removed, however, he did not address the fact that of course, every build/team has counters, and it's not fair to rate a build low because he can cite a build which happens to be suited to beat it. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 00:11, 15 September 2007 (CEST) ::HMM? that only happens on? o what is it.... o i know 99% of all builds here. Vetting system is suck. Bim 00:14, 15 September 2007 (CEST) :::English please. —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ〚ŞƳŞŌƤ〛 00:15, 15 September 2007 (CEST) :::First of all, these posts shouldn't be responded to unless your comment actually effects the status of the request. Second of all, I would disagree with your contention. Excepting cases in which someone voted down because the meta provided a counter to the build (like, this won't work now that everyone is using skill x), I don't commonly see ratings that are based solely on the idea that onla single, now overly common, build is acts as a counter. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 00:17, 15 September 2007 (CEST) ::::explain please -Bim 00:15, 15 September 2007 (CEST) :::::"HMM? that only happens on? o what is it.... o i know 99% of all builds here. Vetting system is suck." is not english. Can you please rephrase your collection of letters to form coherent and understandable sentences? —ǥrɩɳsɧƿoɲ〚ŞƳŞŌƤ〛 00:18, 15 September 2007 (CEST) :::::: Sorry i meant more like biased voting, low votes to keep out of certain category, large gangs of users dominating a build, the usual etc etc. And i was using sarcasm, claiming i forgot and then suddenly remembered. just pay attention to the 99% part. And btw welcome to the internet where people go ZFGOSALOLAZOMG!!! and say things like phail mucho times Bim 00:21, 15 September 2007 (CEST) Skakid9090's build should be removed (again?). He vote 0 in Universality because its usable in hero battles only but its designed for HB only.--[[User:Taan|'Taan']] (T/ ) 14:51, 17 September 2007 (CEST) :It does not adapt well, since it is a hero. If the enemy acts differently, it fails. If it's not used in HB, it fails. — Skakid9090 03:45, 19 September 2007 (CEST) ::This is like voting a 55 monk low because it functions poorly against Touchers in AB. It works for Hero Battles. End of story. [[User:Mgrinshpon|'—ǥrɩɳsɧ']][[User talk:Mgrinshpon|'ƿoɲ']] 03:47, 19 September 2007 (CEST) Pretty much every vote gives no reason why it was rated 5-5-5 or 5-4-5. Innovation reasons are especially bad. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 23:18, 19 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 00:22, 20 September 2007 (CEST) I want a cookie's vote is 0-0-0 with almost no justification. ~ [[User:ZamaneeJinn|'ZamaneeJinn']] ( ) 05:16, 23 September 2007 (CEST) :Dealt with. -- Armond Warblade 05:21, 23 September 2007 (CEST) Pls remove Alpinistas vote. The build states to activate GoK before entering battle so that it will be recharged in battle. That way you CAN use Ash Blast and Aftershock Kastore 19:13, 20 September 2007 (CEST) :Resolved. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 03:06, 21 September 2007 (CEST) ::Request to delete Skakid9090's vote. 0-0-0 because he doesnt like casters in melee range. Well than he just shall not go for melee. GO for the caster instead. Kastore 10:52, 23 September 2007 (CEST)